Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/302,587

REINFORCEMENT AND REPAIR METHOD, REPAIR MATERIAL AND ABRASION DEPTH PREDICTION METHOD FOR DEBRIS FLOW PREVENTION STRUCTURE

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Aug 18, 2025
Priority
Apr 08, 2025 — CN 202510428586.X
Examiner
MAYY, MOHAMMAD
Art Unit
1718
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Institute Of Mountain Hazards And Environment Chinese Academy Of Sciences
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
2-3
OA Rounds
1y 11m
Est. Remaining
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allowance Rate
210 granted / 433 resolved
-16.5% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
468
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
63.2%
+23.2% vs TC avg
§102
7.5%
-32.5% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 433 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . DETAILED ACTION Claim 6 withdrawn Claim 9 new Claim 1 amended Claims 7-8 cancelled Claims 1-5 and 9 pending Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-5 and 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim 1 recite; evaluating surface abrasion depth, formulate a reinforcement and repair strategy, determining a repairing timing, identifying an area, selecting parameters, cleaning the area, pouring a material onto the area, arranging a surface layer for repair or enhance resist surface damage, curing the material; where the evaluation of the surface abrasion depth is based on the following equation E h a × k × t ρ c . This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the steps of evaluating surface abrasion depth, formulate a reinforcement and repair strategy, determining a repairing timing, identifying an area, selecting parameters, arranging a surface layer for repair or enhance resist surface damage; are not actual concert step in a method claim, as ordinary skilled person in the art would be need to more than thinking process to achieve all of those steps. As for the cleaning, pouring and curing steps, those do not sufficiently amount to significant more than the judicial exception/an abstract idea. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claims requires the steps of evaluating surface abrasion depth, formulate a reinforcement and repair strategy, determining a repairing timing, identifying an area, selecting parameters, arranging a surface layer for repair or enhance resist surface damage. As ordinary skilled person in the art would decide to evaluate, formulate, determine, identify, select, arrange a surface, without having an active step, as all of those are mere thinking processes. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, filed 05/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5, 9 under 103a have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection under 101. In light of the applicant’s amendment, the previously applied claims rejections are withdrawn and new 101 rejection is applied. Therefore, the applicant’s arguments are moot. All other applicant arguments not specifically addressed above are deemed unpersuasive as either not commensurate in scope with the broadly drafted claims or are unsupported by factual evidence and are deemed mere attorney speculation. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammad Mayy whose telephone number is (571)272-9983. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 11:00AM-7:00PM EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 571-272-5166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Mohammad Mayy/ Art Unit 1718 /GORDON BALDWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 18, 2025
Application Filed
May 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101
May 27, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12768032
AREA-SELECTIVE FILM FORMING METHOD USING POLYUREA
2y 3m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12768033
DEPOSITION OF TRANSITION METAL-COMPRISING MATERIAL
1y 10m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12759016
INTERSTITIALLY MIXED SELF-ASSEMBLED MONOLAYERS AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME BY RESEM
3y 7m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12752340
REACTIVE METAL POWDERS IN-FLIGHT HEAT TREATMENT PROCESSES
1y 9m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12734544
Slot Die Coating Using Concave Die Lip Over Deformable Back-Up Roll
3y 11m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
48%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+23.2%)
3y 2m (~1y 11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 433 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month